Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • AMEX and TSB the 2 Creditors who you need to worry about the least, ever!  Just stop paying them and forget about it, ignore all their threat o gram letters.  Only if, and with these 2 it's a massive if, you end up with a claim form you need to respond, and there will be plenty of help here.
    • No, nothing from Barclays. Turns out i have 2 accounts on here, and i posted originally on the other one. Sorry about that.  
    • Always send with proof of posting from your Post Office, so there is a trail. Conversations , are designed to intimidate into paying, Emails are designed as another way of bombarding. Only EVER communicate in writing, by post.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Tina V Abbey *** WON ***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1885 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 184
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Flames that is wierd, :S

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah been reading them, so yet more waiting then hhhuuummpppppffffff!!!

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

AQ sent off to the court, plus a copy of it to Alison burton, sent a reminder email also to Alison saying:

 

Dear Alison,

 

just a reminder that I have posted my AQ to the court today, also I have posted yourself a copy of the AQ by recorded delivery, as a good will guesture.

 

Kind regards

 

Tina :D

 

hopefully what I put in the ''other infomation'' will get them moving a bit faster!

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok this morning I have recieved a letter from DLA saying that they have sent back thier AQ and an offer for 50% is still open,

 

I know a couple others on here have had this letter, but I have a couple of questions:

 

how long will this stage take?

 

how long will it take the court to give me a hearing date?

 

really sick of waiting now........................:mad:

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG!! you've been waiting 2 months! ARRRGGGHHH!! can't stand the waiting!

 

Thanks anyway Sharon

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

NOOOOOOOOO!!!! I don't want to wait that long!! I'm gutted now :( bet you are too!

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes I did send a copy to DLA with the ''other information'' filled in, but your reply has got me wonedering, do I have to amend my claim to add the 8% interest per day or do the courts do that?

 

so from the time the papers were served until now it's been adding this 8% per day? or from when I handed in my court claim to sue Abbey?

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes that's what I put, I got all confused over working it out and just copied someone elses who had put that but with my amounts instead, I'm number dyslexic lmao!

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

so sick of waiting now (ARGGHHHHHH) is there anything I can do to speed this up at this stage?

 

or do I just have to wait until the courts set a hearing date? (they don't rush do they lol)

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi All,

 

ok got a letter from the courts today, my hearing is for the 13th Dec, now it say's in this letter that I should send copies of all documents to DLA and the courts, I want to know what to send and if there's a letter I can send to both parties explaining why I have made this claim (evidence etc)

 

anything else to add to this list?

 

1) copy of the charges

2) letter explaining why I want my charges back (don't know how to word this, would be greatful for some help)

3) the letters I've had off Abbey??? (not sure)

 

and also I'd like to send an e-mail to Alison Burton, but don't know what to write, I want to let her know that I want full payment before this hearing, but don't know how to word it, just to give them a little nudge

 

anything else?? HELP!! PLZ!! :? :? :? :?

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

Karne, (or anyone who knows) I copied this from another thread you'd replied on can you please help me out?:? :? :?

 

1) Copy of OFT report

2) Dunlop vs New garage

3) Murray vs Leisure play

4) Copies of all letters to and from Abbey (excluding without prejudice ones in the courts and defendants copy but include them in your own copy for reference)

5) County Courts Act s.69

6) Unfair contract terms act 1977 - relevant sections

7) Consumer Credit Regulations 1999 - relevant sections

8 ) Schedule of charges (probably all the statements in your own copy for reference)

 

I'm really confused!! I need HELP!

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks Karne your a life saver, I got all worked up about this letter this morning!

 

I have got to hand in the documents 2 weeks before the hearing date, but as I'm a nervous wreck all the time I like to do things WELL in advance lol.

 

I did put cost cals on my AQ, can I be cheeky and ask for a copy of the letter you sent to your judge? think I'll send it to mine too ;)

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil don't put the heebee jeebee's up me now! I'm a mess already!

 

why do you think it's such a wait? do you think Abbey are going to go ahead with it then and defend? the judge has put aside 3 hours for this hearing too, should I be worried? *won't sleep tonight now*

 

I've been waiting since April for this and now I'm scared!

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Tina

 

I'm really sorry, I never meant to put the "heebee jeebee's" up you now!!!!:)

 

My question was asked quite innocently, as I thought a court hearing could have been arranged a little sooner. My point in thinking, being that the sooner the hearing, the sooner you will get your hands on your little savings pot that the shABBEY have been looking after for you!!!!!

 

Like Karne says, I don't think you have anything to worry about, as you have done everything to the book.

 

Keep your spirits up! Please sleep tonight!

Phil:)

This is only my personal, honest opinion!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tina, take a look at my thread v Halifax, there's a list of documents and how they are ordered and labelled.

 

Each document should have a reference letter (A) (B) etc and then each page in any ducument numbered.

 

Produce an INDEX of these.

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

aint been around for ages as I'm having internet trouble at home, so am in the library now, that's a lot of infomation I have to gather phew!! I hope to get my home internet up and running soon so will be getting to it :D thanks for all the help!

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

quick question, I have had £110 charges this month can I amend my claim for this and if so how? Thanks!

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the replies,

 

I've have been reading about Abbey's delay tacktics and that's why I've asked what to do incase this happens, I haven't however read what others have done, as it doesn't say (yet), but I will keep on reading ;)

 

I know what to do if they send me that microthingy rubbish though :D

What microthingy rubbish?!!

 

I have sent off the DPA letter to Abbey and received pages of details which so far make no sense what-so-ever and I'm wondering whether this is it? Can you send me the link to that info or tell me how to find it please? Ta!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was refering to this, which is at the top of this abbey section

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/4031-abbey-microfiche-argument.html

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, right. Thanks!

 

Thats not what I got... has anyone received their "statements" in a really weird format that doesn't make much sense? It feels very much like they are saying "here is the info you asked for but 'ha-ha' you can't understand it!"????

Link to post
Share on other sites

that's the microfiche printed out statments, you'll just have to try and work them out, took me ages!

Data Protection Act letter sent 10/04/2006,

priliminary letter sent 23/05/06,

LBA sent 7/06/06

claim issued 23/06/06

deemed to be served 25/06/06

Abbey Acknowledged with intent to defend, they have got until: 23/07/06

50% offered + interest, rejected: 21/07/06

AQ recieved 27/07/06,

AQ posted back 09/08/06

Court date 13/12/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1885 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...